|
|
Post by neodawson on Dec 29, 2012 4:54:35 GMT
How many of you have seen this documentary about the early church from PBS? They seem to play it every Christmas and Easter. www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/Any thoughts? Overall I find it decent as far as documentaries go, although I don't care much for Dominic Crossan and Elaine Pagels. |
|
|
|
Post by neodawson on Dec 29, 2012 4:56:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by unkleE on Dec 29, 2012 21:41:21 GMT
I've never heard of it before. But I agree with you about Crossan and Pagels. They seem to come from one side of the fence, and it would have helped to have some balance - did they use other scholars who would have provided that balance?
Maurice Casey (whose book is being discussed on another thread) is quite critical of Crossan, and I get the feeling he is no longer as influential as he was a decade or so ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by wraggy on Dec 30, 2012 5:18:25 GMT
I am surprised that you have not seen this doco before unkleE. I have seen it and I am sure it was aired on either SBS or ABC. But I spend most of my TV gazing at SBS and ABC. They generally have more documentaries as well as having real current affairs and a better news service.
As for the comment about one point of view being expressed. That seems to be the way with most documentaries on TV these days regardless of the topic in question, although I can think of some exceptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by neodawson on Dec 30, 2012 6:10:44 GMT
I've never heard of it before. But I agree with you about Crossan and Pagels. They seem to come from one side of the fence, and it would have helped to have some balance - did they use other scholars who would have provided that balance? Maurice Casey (whose book is being discussed on another thread) is quite critical of Crossan, and I get the feeling he is no longer as influential as he was a decade or so ago. On the site I linked in the OP, you can watch the whole program there. If not, here's the program on youtube: www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLA8CDB0262EE3C7D9As for other scholars mentioned in the program, here's a list. www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/etc/bios.htmlWayne A. Meeks is interviewed, and he was the one scholar(besides Pagels and Crossan) that I'm most familiar with, and I enjoyed his book The First Urban Christians. I have glanced through the thread about Casey, about I haven't had a chance to read his work yet. |
|
|
|
Post by neodawson on Dec 30, 2012 6:22:48 GMT
The common view presented here(and Crossan seems to set the tone of discussion) for how the Gospels are to be read as symbolic interpretations of different Christian communities, not as actual biographies of Jesus. I could see how each writer would give his own interpretation to Jesus's message and life, emphasizing certain sayings or actions over others, but overall they're still talking about the life of Jesus. This would be comparable to how certain ministries would focus on certain aspects of the Gospel message over others.
If the Gospels were completely symbolic and non-historical by nature, how on earth could we really determine anything about the historical nature of Jesus? I'm thinking of the Jesus Seminar here.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by unkleE on Dec 30, 2012 20:56:39 GMT
Thanks. There were a few names there I recognised, two I have read books by (Crossan, Fredriksen), two I have read small amounts of on the web (Koester, White), but I didn't recognise the others. But they have drawn from a reasonable list I think, though the outcome was (from what you say) still a little one-sided, just as a christian apologetic would be a bit one-sided in the opposite direction. I guess they have no obligation to be even-handed, and being more radical is more likely to sell. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by ignorantianescia on Dec 30, 2012 22:07:08 GMT
I guess they have no obligation to be even-handed, and being more radical is more likely to sell. Thanks. I don't know, PBS is public broadcasting after all. Isn't it legally required to give a relatively balanced view because of that? |
|
|
|
Post by neodawson on Dec 31, 2012 2:26:27 GMT
I don't know, PBS is public broadcasting after all. Isn't it legally required to give a relatively balanced view because of that? PBS can be hit or miss on this. To give an example, during their special on Martin Luther, I don't recall too much in the way of what you could call a "Catholic" point of view being expressed. www.pbs.org/empires/martinluther/ |
|
|
|
Post by neodawson on Dec 31, 2012 3:09:11 GMT
Also this was done in 1998, and the Jesus Seminar was still active IIRC. I've noticed many documentaries concerning the New Testament from the mid to late 90s tended to be biased towards the views of the Jesus Seminar. A parallel to nowadays where the Bauer thesis seems to be the predominant view on documentaries about early Christianity.
Since it's also "Frontline" which is supposed to be a program concerning investigative journalism on current events, perhaps this was meant as an expose of the current "scholarship" on Christianity's origins. That seems to be implied in the intro to the program.
A few more thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by unkleE on Dec 31, 2012 3:46:49 GMT
I guess it won't be long before believing in the New Testament will be radical!!!  |
|
